![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rollicking good time in the Wanttaja household lately, with another set of
homebuilt registrations statistics/homebuilt accident statistics analyses under way. Based on my 4 January 2008 FAA registration database, there are 30367 Experimental/Amateur-Built aircraft registered in the US. This does not include homebuilt aircraft that are not listed as having airworthiness certificates (which does not mean they don't, of course). The fleet size increased by 940 aircraft vs. my January 8 2007 database. This is roughly equivalent to the preceding few years, but is down a bit from the early 2000s. However, in the past several years, the FAA has been de-registering a bunch of aircraft. This may be affecting the statistics to some extent. The following table shows the percentage of the total homebuilt fleet of particular homebuilt types: Aircraft % RV-6 5.5% (e.g, 5.5% of all homebuilts are RV-6s or RV-6As) Kitfox 3.2% RV-4 3.1% Pitts 3.0% Bensen 2.5% RV-8 2.3% (Both taildraggers and trigear types) Lancair (All) 2.3% Glasair 2.1% RANS (All) 1.9% Challenger 1.8% Long-EZ 1.6% Stolp 1.6% Rotorway (All) 1.6% Avid 1.6% Starduster/Acroduster 1.5% RV-7 1.5% (Both taildraggers and trigear types) Zenair 1.4% KR-2 1.1% Pietenpol 1.1% (Includes Grega versions) T-18 1.1% Glastar 1.0% (Includes Sportsman models) Baby/Junior Ace 0.9% Fly Baby 0.9% RV-9 0.9% Christen Eagle 0.8% Quickie 0.8% Velocity 0.7% Lancair IV 0.7% Sea Rey 0.6% RV-3 0.6% Murphy 0.6% BD-4 0.5% Sonex 0.5% (Includes Waiex) Cozy 0.5% RV-10 0.3% BD-5 0.3% Europa 0.2% About 14% of the whole homebuilt fleet are Vans designs. Accident analyses are fascinating, as always. Results should be in Kitplanes in October. Ron Wanttaja |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ron Wanttaja wrote:
Rollicking good time in the Wanttaja household lately, with another set of homebuilt registrations statistics/homebuilt accident statistics analyses under way. interesting data there Ron. RVs make up 14.2% of the fleet. That is impressive. How are you pulling the data for those folks that don't keep the designer's name on the registration in any way? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 08:24:07 -0500, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote: Ron Wanttaja wrote: Rollicking good time in the Wanttaja household lately, with another set of homebuilt registrations statistics/homebuilt accident statistics analyses under way. interesting data there Ron. RVs make up 14.2% of the fleet. That is impressive. How are you pulling the data for those folks that don't keep the designer's name on the registration in any way? No way of telling if they call their RV-6 a "Jones Special," of course. Most keep *some* sort of relationship with the designer/kit maker's designation for the aircraft. When developing filters, I start with something fairly broad, then examine the hits to discover what other designations might be used for the aircraft, then tune from there. For example, when trying to spot the Glastars, I initially ran a search on just that name. Looking at the listings, I then see that a numeric designation of the design can be "GS-1" or "SH-4". So I add variations of them to the filter... I look for "GS-1", "GS 1", and "GS1", and the same variations on SH-4. Unfortunately, when I search for "*GS 1*", it ALSO hits the Schweizer SGS 1-23 glider. So I have to add exclusions for similar but incorrect designations. Sometimes I have to add a filter just to keep one sneaky incorrect entry from popping up. Here are my ultimate criteria for finding the Glastars: (Like "*SH-4*" Or Like "*SH4*" Or Like "*SH 4*") And Not Like "*CONTROL*" And Not Like "*Sportsman*" or (Like "*SH-4*" Or Like "*SH4*" Or Like "*SH 4*") And Not Like "*CONTROL*" And Not Like "*Sportsman*" I exclude "Sportsman" from my Glastar search because I have a separate filter for the Sportsman (which, in itself, includes filters to eliminate the Wag-Aero Sportsman and other planes using that name). I eventually had to include a year-of-manufacture filter just to get rid of some of the non-Glastar variants. I've seen listings where they *spell* out the number (e.g. "BD FIVE"), but they're rare enough that I don't routinely add that kind of filter. The filtration is never perfect, of course. I don't catch the misspellings ("Glassair") or name abbreviations ("STRD HMLTN SUPER IIS") and other such variations. In my experience, though, the variations are rare enough that they don't really impact the numbers much. The list I posted accounts for about *half* the total number of Experimental Amateur-Built registrations. The remaining types are a wide variety... Breezies, CA-65s, Stephens, Miniplanes, Jungsters, Cassutts, Sonerais, etc. A few dozen of one type, a hundred or so of another, it adds up. If anyone feels I left a major type off my list, let me know. Ron Wanttaja |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 2, 10:55*am, Ron Wanttaja wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 08:24:07 -0500, Gig 601Xl Builder wrote: Ron Wanttaja wrote: Rollicking good time in the Wanttaja household lately, with another set of homebuilt registrations statistics/homebuilt accident statistics analyses under way. interesting data there Ron. RVs make up 14.2% of the fleet. That is impressive. How are you pulling the data for those folks that don't keep the designer's name on the registration in any way? No way of telling if they call their RV-6 a "Jones Special," of course. *Most keep *some* sort of relationship with the designer/kit maker's designation for the aircraft. When developing filters, I start with something fairly broad, then examine the hits to discover what other designations might be used for the aircraft, then tune from there. For example, when trying to spot the Glastars, I initially ran a search on just that name. *Looking at the listings, I then see that a numeric designation of the design can be "GS-1" or "SH-4". *So I add variations of them to the filter... I look for "GS-1", "GS 1", and "GS1", and the same variations on SH-4. Unfortunately, when I search for "*GS 1*", it ALSO hits the Schweizer SGS 1-23 glider. *So I have to add exclusions for similar but incorrect designations. Sometimes I have to add a filter just to keep one sneaky incorrect entry from popping up. Here are my ultimate criteria for finding the Glastars: (Like "*SH-4*" Or Like "*SH4*" Or Like "*SH 4*") And Not Like "*CONTROL*" And Not Like "*Sportsman*" or (Like "*SH-4*" Or Like "*SH4*" Or Like "*SH 4*") And Not Like "*CONTROL*" And Not Like "*Sportsman*" I exclude "Sportsman" from my Glastar search because I have a separate filter for the Sportsman (which, in itself, includes filters to eliminate the Wag-Aero Sportsman and other planes using that name). *I eventually had to include a year-of-manufacture filter just to get rid of some of the non-Glastar variants. I've seen listings where they *spell* out the number (e.g. "BD FIVE"), but they're rare enough that I don't routinely add that kind of filter. *The filtration is never perfect, of course. *I don't catch the misspellings ("Glassair") or name abbreviations ("STRD HMLTN SUPER IIS") and other such variations. *In my experience, though, the variations are rare enough that they don't really impact the numbers much. The list I posted accounts for about *half* the total number of Experimental Amateur-Built registrations. *The remaining types are a wide variety... Breezies, CA-65s, Stephens, Miniplanes, Jungsters, Cassutts, Sonerais, etc.. *A few dozen of one type, a hundred or so of another, it adds up. *If anyone feels I left a major type off my list, let me know. Ron Wanttaja Maybe this will help you in classifying entries. In real life my job is database programming and data management. In situations like this I'll put the data into a temporary table with an additional column called "Processed" I'll run my statements wherein I am trying to find a particular pattern and when I get a good match, e.g. Schweizer SGS 1-23, I would mark it as processed. When I later try to match the GS 1 entries I can exclude the ones that were already processed so that my pattern that is a little broader than I'd like has most of the potential bad matches already moved from its source list. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Monthly News Statistics for demon.local: month of Sep 2007. | Michael Baldwin, Bruce[_2_] | Products | 2 | October 16th 07 03:05 AM |
Monthly News Statistics for demon.local: month of Sep 2007. | Peter Hucker[_2_] | Products | 2 | October 13th 07 01:20 PM |
Monthly News Statistics for demon.local: month of Sep 2007. | Peter Hucker[_2_] | Products | 7 | October 2nd 07 07:18 PM |
Monthly News Statistics for demon.local: month of Sep 2007. | John \C\ | Products | 0 | October 1st 07 03:01 AM |
2004 Homebuilt Statistics | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 8 | January 15th 05 04:24 PM |